One of the most popular ways to spend your excess CPU cycles is now available for the Playstation 3. There will be a version for ATI graphics cards in the near future as well. An open beta utilizing the specialized GPU in ATI's graphics boards begins at the end of September. The use of graphics cards and specialized processors built into video game systems is part of a High-Performance project that increases processing 20-40x over a conventional CPU. Of course, this only works for, “certain types of calculations,” as noted by FAH.

Interestingly, NVidia's GPUs are not currently set to be used for this project as stated by FAH: “…we have now concentrated on ATI GPU's as they allow for significant performance increases for FAH over NVIDIA's GPU's (at least at the current generation)”

For some background, the Folding@Home project is a non-profit project run by Stanford University that seeks to understand the nature of protein folding by utilizing the idle CPU cycles of thousands of home computers to fold many different combinations of proteins. The aim of the project is to build better synthetic polymers, and also understand how proteins can fold in the wrong way, and potentially gain insight into several debilitating diseases.

ROB'S OPINION
The possibility of using highly specialized processors for some of these number crunching projects is definitely exciting. The problem is that the GPUs and processors are sometimes so specific that it's hard to find a good match. I'm guessing this could be where NVidia's hardware gets left out in the cold (at least for now). Perhaps one little feature needed to get things going is lacking for this specific task. That hasn't prevented NVidia and ATI from remaining neck and neck in the GPU race.

In the PS3 FAQ for FAH, it states, “Using the Cell processor of the PS3, we should be able to do more folding than what one could do on a PC.” That's a far cry from a 20-40x speedup that is expected in a GPU. It's also a bit odd to me that FAH would compare a fixed architecture (the PS3) in that way to a PC, which is constantly growing in processing strength, and could contain multiples of their preferred ATI boards to make a PS3 again look like a toy (uh… it is a toy, right? No insult intended!).

Ultimately, this does speak well of Sony's PS3, and this is likely what Sony was as they have publicized this as well. It is impressive that Sony's PS3 can, “…offer real time visualization for the first time,” but give me a break. The statement that this can be done because, “…since the PS3 has a powerful GPU,” sounds a bit overstated to me. No doubt the GPU is powerful, but are they saying that PCs somehow lack the power to do the same thing? I think this whole thing is a great project, but it looks like it was tainted a little bit here by some Sony PR without showing any real performance numbers.

The Broadband Engine in the PS3 is a 218Gflops monster at 3.2Ghz. It will crank through F@H data faster than any other chip on the planet.

I'm not sure why they are even bothering with the ATI gimmick. An x86 style GPU doesn't remotely come close to the usable computational power of the PS3's Cell chip. And what is worse it is a nightmare to try to convert general computation code to work on the silly little 'shader programs'. I guess it is better than nothing for pc owners with wimpy Intel/AMD chips in their systems.

Regardless, x86 owners are about to get humiliated. So much for all those bogus SPEC scores Intel loves to try to brag about…

- by Eclipse

Good idea but…(11:50am EST Thu Aug 24 2006)When my computer is idle, I shut it off. I guess if you are going to leave it running you should do something helpful.I wonder, however, if it would be more cost efficient to use a GPU on a PC.- by IP Student

well…..(11:55am EST Thu Aug 24 2006)you don't get anything from it except for a higher electric bill - by fds

Do you work for Sony?(11:55am EST Thu Aug 24 2006)Eclipse, 218Gflops? Where's the actual performance numbers of how quickly FAH will crank compared to an x86 box? - by Hehe

Re:Eclipse(11:56am EST Thu Aug 24 2006)Nice try but according to Sony, the PS3 CPU is 1.8 Teraflops, which seems to be substantially kick the butt of the 218 gigaflops of the PS3 CPU.

Call me silly but I think 1.8 Tflops beat 218 Gflops. And guess what, PC's have graphic cards that are faster than that the GPU in the PS3. - by IP Student

actual performance numbers(12:01pm EST Thu Aug 24 2006)Folding@Home claims the PS3 client achieves 100Gflops, which certainly sounds like it should be much faster than any current PC client. I'm sure we'll get more concrete comparisons later.

(The 218Gflops figure is the Cell's theoretical peak. 1.8Tflops is the PS3's theoretical peak including the GPU. As far as Folding@Home is concerned, only the Cell is relevant at the moment for computation). - by Ilk

Uh, not so fast(12:13pm EST Thu Aug 24 2006)THe PS3 FAH FAQ states:“With this new technology (as well as new advances with GPUs), we will likely be able to attain performance on the 100 gigaflop scale per computer.”

This says nothing about the PS3 specifically. It only says what FAH would hope to achieve when they really have their high performance project cranking and using GPUs. - by Kirk

neat idea(12:23pm EST Thu Aug 24 2006)thats all i can say nothing to really get excited about unless they actually use to to good potential. - by PRAETORIAN MAN!!!!

oh nvm(12:31pm EST Thu Aug 24 2006)yeah, i really didnt get what this was until i read a bit more about it. yeah, thats pretty cool. - by PRAETORIAN MAN!!!!

Gflops on Cell. Depending on future optimizations, F@H could get much closer to the 218GFlop (IBM says it's actually 230.4 GFLOPs at 3.2GHz) peak.

You know one intersting thought about Cell and the claims of being a supercomputer on a chip. If you look at the Cray architecture of the 90s, the Cray Y-MP had 4 or 8 vector processors (and a front end processor – 1 general purpose CPU and 8 vector units, sounds familiar when thinking of the Cell, doesn't it?) and managed to crank about 2.5 GFlops at a modest 167 MHz clock (8 vector units). Scale that clock to 3.2GHz (roughly 20 times faster) you achieve only 50 GFlops. Granted these are double precision not single. However you can see that calling cell a super computer on a chip is not exactly incorrect. Cell is actually approximately on par in performance with the Hitachi SR2201/1024 , which was the world's fastest super computer in 1996. If you look at the double precision performance of cell things are a little different. cell is rated at 'only' 21 GFLOPS DP floating-point, and 230.4GFLOPS SP floating point according to IBM. However, that 21GFlops double precision is still a little more than 8 times the performance of the Cray, and approximately he same as an NEC Supercomputer from the 90's (NEC SX-3/44R considered fastes in 1990). Compare that to the 4.8 GFlops theoretically available on a 2.4GHz Athlon 64 (and similar from P4 & Conroe).

Before anyone dismisses comparisons to super computers from the 90's. please remember that the super computers I'm comparing against cost millions and millions of dollars and were the premier systems on the face of the planet in their day. Cell by comparison is a single chip made by the million costing peanuts by comparison. Also, the comparisons of performance are real comparisons of raw math performance. When Sony stated tht this thing would be a super computer for the home, they were in essence telling the truth.

Just though some would be interested…- by HighlandCynic

Okay, but…(1:05pm EST Thu Aug 24 2006)I don't think that Sony was comparing the Cell's processing power to a 1970's supercomputer. I think they are claiming that it is a supercomputer compared to the machines of today.

I also take exception to the very fact that you are comparing the Cell to a 1970's super computer. I am not as knowledgable to the power of yesterday's supercomputers, but I would imagine that my AMD64 3500+ CPU has more processing power (meaning that it can do more calculations) than a supercomputer from the mid-60's. That machine probably cost millions and millions too and my processor cost me $308 when I purchased it in Jan 2005. Does that mean that my 3500+ is a supercomputer too? I don't think so.

No one should deny that the Cell is a strong processing performer, but I don't like when we compare apples to oranges. Sony is trying to oversell the Cell's performance. It is a good chip. Let's get away from the “it's a supercomputer” nonsense. - by bneals

bneals(1:40pm EST Thu Aug 24 2006)1970s, who said 1970's? Sure wasn't me. The super computers I mentioned are all from the 1990's the Hitatchi and NEC systems were the peak of performance at the times mentioned.

Really, if you must argue with my post, at least be accurate.

An AMD64 doesn't even come close to comparing on performance terms. Your AMD64 can't even come close to the double precision performance of Cell, and not even in the same ballpark as it's singler precision performance. So why are you even bothering to use it as an example?

An AMD has more power than a 60's super computer? OK, but does it even hold a candle to any super computer from the mid 90's? No, it doesn't. Get a grip, the difference between a super computer from the 60s or 70s and anything built in the 90's is vast.

- by HighlandCynic

wtf?(1:58pm EST Thu Aug 24 2006)what percentage of gamers do they expect will participate? i'm guessing low numbers. this is best kept to computers, since it is the most widespread/popular computing device. - by madden 98 player

Build you own 1 billion teraflop circuit(2:47pm EST Thu Aug 24 2006)If you only want to count teraflops and don't care how practical it is do do something useful (like the PS3 marketing hype), I've got the perfect 1 billion teraflop circuit for you. You can even build it at home!

This circuit multiplies a one bit mantissa, zero bit exponent floating point number by one. To build this circuit, all you have to do is get a short piece of copper wire and connect one end to the input data source. The result of the multiplication will then appear at the other end of the wire.

What is this circuit good for? Not much. Likewise, what are all those PS3 terraflops good for if the games don't even look as good as the XBox 360 games?

Is this the same type of thing the Wii can do? Which is, you leave the Wii on all the time and it downloads stuff to the Wii throughout the day? That's what it sounds like to me, anyway. If so, that's pretty cool. I dunno what you're all talking about why the terraflops and booblebops matter so much if that's all the thing is touting.

Simple question from a non-techie. - by Maynard

Maynard(3:17pm EST Thu Aug 24 2006)The poisnt of this artical is the PS3's CPU/GPU can run one type of code really fast. Now introduce a code that requires double presions float point operations and it chokes. - by Just Me.

The Broadband Engine easily smokes anything from x86-land in DP. The BE was never designed to be used for heavy DP work and it still easily beats any Intel/AMD chips out.

If the BE 'chokes' at DP what the hell do you call x86 DP performance???

And IBM is working on a new DP targeted Cell chip right now…

Poor Intel keeps trying to bolt on more cores to their heinously outdated chips but that is only going to slightly slow how fast x86 is getting left behind. Intel's Cell clone type chips are still around a decade away from hitting the shelves.

No big deal if you sit around jerking off to bogus SPEC scores from Intel's marketing compiler…

- by Elian

Elian(6:47pm EST Thu Aug 24 2006)hey, turning a board into a flame war is MY job.lol. - by PRAETORIAN MAN!!!!

Mad Cow(7:53pm EST Thu Aug 24 2006)Folding protiens is how we get Mad Cow disease and is suspected in Alzheimer's.

Sometimes the researchers doing the best work have the least resources. These kinds of programs can tilt the balance. It is no longer who has the most money, but who has the best cause. We all choose with our donated computer power.

So leave your PS3 on when you're off and run the software. It may save your life someday.

- by good stuff

i thought…(8:56pm EST Thu Aug 24 2006)the processor in the ps3 was so powerful that all this could be done on 1 ps3 i less than 3 minutes… or at least, that's what kuturagi told me.

was he lying?? - by ps3willphonehome

PRAETORIAN MAN!!!!(9:01pm EST Thu Aug 24 2006)YOU ARE THE BEST BOARD FLAMER THERE IS. Don't worry. Your job is safe as the Sony kiss ass of Geek. You are still C.E.O - by Wilson

SEE. I AM RIGHT!!!(9:47pm EST Thu Aug 24 2006)This is why i keep telling everyone that the PS3 is the most powerful console ever made. - by GodofWar

idiots(9:54pm EST Thu Aug 24 2006)the ps3 is a dedicated unit of course the numbers will be higher than any pc benchmark a pc at any given time is running at least 30 other pos. not including what you are using where the ps3 will only run maybe 5 its all in allocation people think - by jeff

Love My 360(1:57am EST Fri Aug 25 2006)Sony is not having production problems at all. This is a big lie. They will have 6 million plus consoles ready for launch. Even more. You are full of it. - by GodofWar

Elian(3:15am EST Fri Aug 25 2006)What bench marks do you have to backup you information?

Also if you consider a PC with a custom OS and custom programs performance is enhanced by a magnitude due to less overhead.

So comparing a PC thats running Windows to a custom cut down Linux OS running on custom hardware running hihly optimized code with only one program your benchmarks are gonna be off the charts. - by Just Me

Six Million Brooklyn Bridges for Sale(3:33am EST Fri Aug 25 2006)If Sony has already made six million PS3s then I've got six million Brooklyn Bridges to sell you too.

Sony's stock just took a big hit when the production problems were raised by an analyst.

Check the news for details.- by Lovin My 360

Vista to spoil the party?(7:01am EST Fri Aug 25 2006)So we have huge resources of unused processing power in our gpus. but with vista aero interface the gpu is in constant use, further more vistas driver architecture seems tobe a serious hinderence for lots of tasks. cant recall which now.

So is vista to spoil all the fun? - by DX2

gpu's to pc's(10:06am EST Fri Aug 25 2006)ALL of this is a blast to read and yes I know about all of them one says compairing apples to oranges well that is way off in my book more like to me compairing apples to blueberries!! I know that you can play “games” on the ps3 and the xbox 360! But why are yall compairing pc's to them? All of yall know that a pc is made to do the same as far as playing games but if you want to a real compairason try compairing the game units instead of adding the pc in the mix unless you compair the server boards and motherboards of today with multipal CPU's and GPU's!! Come on look at the newest boards with two pci-e 16x with 2 1 gig video cards and atleast 4 gigs of memory and the newest 5000+ AMD chip now is that more like it being able to compair apples to apples!! Even with the new windows comming out is that going to change anything as far as compairing anything but a game console to a pc!?!? If you ask me ( or not ) I think that a game console was made to do just what it is made to do and nothing more than that and a pc is made to that and some!! Look at it like this can you download or surf the net with a game console well no atleast not for now but one day maybe, but not now so leave the pc out of it for now and compair what you have that they can sell you for a game unit and leave the pc where it is in its own world!! oh and by the way the games you play with on the ps and the xbox are made on and by a pc graphics and all!!!! That is if you didn't know that by now think about them cookies for a while!!!! Like I said this is a Blast to Read and something I needed to really get me in a good mood!! If you want to fold proteins try folding bread it tastes better with meat in it like ham and turkey with a little mayo salt and pepper!! Now that will make your mouth water!! LOL!! :) But none the less all of them are outdated with in a few months and something newer and more powerful is going to be released and cost you like crazy to get in your front door!! Now what about that for a Fact - by davidjplayer2003

thats right VC-1 Blu-Ray titles when those come out we can finally do a good side-by-side comparason with HD-DVD.also, Universal rumoured to join BDA STILL JUST A RUMOR, but if this rumor comes true blu-ray's dim fortcast may just get a bit brighter. - by PRAETORIAN MAN!!!!

according to this article, at this years Games Convention, Microsoft had a clear win over Sony…. mainly due to the fact that Microsoft had a show and Sony hardly even attended.being the obnoxious fanboy that i am, i have one defensive arguement, but its not ONLY because im a fanboy this is CLASSIC Sony here they always surround their shit with mystery and then explode it with hype. where is this hype going to come from? more likely than not, the Tokyo Game Show. i do see some logic here, vomit everything at the audience in one fell swoop, then everything seems more impressive than giving it to them in small doses. at the same time however, it probably would have been in sony's best interest to shine at list a small glimmer of light on the console to help with the bad public reaction its been getting lately.

when i say surround their shit with hype im mainly referring to their plans with PNP, as well as some confirmed specs for the Cell and RSX. if they show that off at this convention, theres not a shitload of stuff to do for TGS. there are, however, 27 playable ps3 demos planed for TGS.

p.s. the article doesnt say anything about nintendo what did they show? - by PRAETORIAN MAN!!!!

Sony Blow Ray, after Blowing Dell, Its OK to blow two pixel in PSP, and one SPE in Cell.Top of two class actions for Blowing DVD's in PS2's, Why I do declare that Sony loves blowing and it stinks of poo.

Sony please die quickly as your stink of your putrid being makes us all gag.

xxxxVeronica - by Veronica

PS3 like sypercomputer(1:14pm EST Thu Aug 31 2006)All tales abouts supercomputer-like performance of game consolse are just, as told, tales. It is easy to design and fabricate fast floating point multiplier and adders (including fused mul-add), fast aproximate inverse and aproximate inverese square root. In that part, consolse (and PCs) are comparable to supercomputers. But supercomputer is not super only becouse massive floating point perfromance, but because of extremly fast memory, both in terms of data bandwith and address bandwith. And if you want to have high sustained performance on relaistic worloads (oposed to adding two same number for bilion times) processor must have fast memory. Fast memory is expensive and it is not easy to package it in small space, like gaming console or PC motherboard. Techniques are well known: memory interliving, multibank memory etc. NEC SX-4 had upto 16384 bans of SDRAM to provide enough bandwith for all its vectors CPUs. 15 years old Cray C90 have higher address bandwith then any PC or gaming console, simply becasuse it's all memory was built from SRAM (and no cache, whole memory is fast as cache).

Without any realistic benchmark (workload as on supercomputer) and execution times, all supercomputer-like is just marketing hype. Realistic workloads would be solving large sparse system of linear equations with preconditioner (say GMRES with incomplete LU), performing FFT in 3D (used in computation fluid dynamics, or even better, complete solver for partial differential equations (with method like finite difference, finite elemente, finite volume, multigrid, spectral..) and some Monte Carlo method. Even simple operations like transposing large matrix (~100MB) would be much better indication of system totaln perfromance in sense of supercomputing.

Or simple resoning: for every flop CPU needs at least on word (32b signle, 64b double) transferd from memory and about half written to it. If no so, CPU will be waitning for memory most of time.